As a bridge between Anakin's fall and Luke' story there's an important issue to keep in mind with regards to attachment. The one thing that can help us heal emotionally with regards to attachment issues is a stable, meaningful relationship with someone who helps balance us; Padme could have been that person for Anakin (she clearly came from a healthy, happy family)...but the Jedi take that away from him to with their rules and beliefs about relationships. First, say bye bye to your secure base, then we will deny you a meaningful relationship. Not a smart move, Jedi.

"Attachment leads to jealousy...", said Yoda to Anakin.

No, Yoda. Attachment leads to security, stability, and mental health...not to mention longevity. Here Yoda reveals the Jedi's biggest blunder, and essentially the nail in their own coffin. For humans, at least, secure attachment is a necessary ingredient for life.

Anakin's chronic anxiety towards his relationship with Padme (which is fueled by the attachment injury of being removed from his PC and subsequent loss of his mother) was the single tool used by Palpatine.

Now for Luke and Leia...when I have time between spending time with my own 1 and 5 year old.

I think an initial question to ask from a psychological point of view is; who is more "damaged"...Luke or Leia? Two very different experiences.

With Leia, you have someone who was most likely told from a young age nothing but glowing things about her birth parents. Based on the closing scene in ROTS, she was loved and cared for as if she was their own...so there is no reason at all to assume she has any significant issues at all. In fact, quite the opposite. She's successful, strong as nails, witty, and very secure in herself. Now some have brought up that she has to deal with the issue of having been tortured by her father etc., but I disagree 100%. Not only did she not know she was his daughter, but neither did Vader. It's a completely different ordeal if he was knowingly torturing his own daughter. Vader did not find out about Leia's existence until hours before his death, and likewise with Leia. Plus, Leia is in a good relationship (I assume) with Han...I don't really see any issues for her to "work out" at all other than reconciling the truth of her past. But she has Han to fall back on, so all in all...very good prognosis for Leia. The one variable with Leia is her newly discovered lineage, and what she may fear with her own children. All in all, though, she had a relatively normal childhood and made a name for herself as she matured.

Luke is another story. I don't get a very "lovey warm touchy feely" vibe from Owen and Beru. Plus, they seem to have taken a different approach than Leia's adoptive parents, more or less holding him back purposely. I just don't get the feeling that they ever talked much about his parents to him, but instead took the opposite approach of avoiding it at all costs out of fear of what the knowledge could do. Luke is clearly thirsty for any knowledge at all about his parents...especially his father...and of course he ends up being lied to. So, we have an adolescent boy with no real PC to attach to at all, and then the only people he knew as parental figures in his life are slaughtered, which leads him on a quest to avenge his father's murder at all cost. From the beginning, the love for his father was driving him. Unlike Leia, Luke has the traumatic experience of the big "reveal", but also has to deal with the very real fact that his father knowingly more or less allowed him to die at the end of TESB. Luke is tortured internally in a way that Leia never had to experience. But then his quest changes...instead of avenging his father, he chooses to save his father, and we all know how that ended up. It's worth noting, though, that in the end, the love for his father was driving him.

So we are left with Leia, who I would argue is more or less a fairly stable individual, but that's because she grew up with a fairly secure attachment...and that shows in her personality. She was also spared much of the family-based trauma that Luke faced all on his own.

Luke, on the other hand, is the one I would worry about. No real parental figures, just caretakers who held him back (out of concern). One father figure (Ben) he starts to become attached to is murdered in front of his eyes by the same man who murdered his father, and then this evil figure turns out to be is true father. Then this real father tries to kill him and manipulate him, only to finally show an ounce of concern by saving him from electrocution at death's door...but then he can't save him and gets to spend all of a minute having an actual conversation with his actual father.

What a nightmare.

What Luke and Leia both have in common is the fear (and we all remember what Yoda said about that) of passing down something evil to their own kids. Not to mention they are raising kids (I'm assuming) with no family support network, which is extremely important. This is discussed in another thread, but the passing on of knowledge, wisdom, and family culture is really important to parents, so just what are they doing? I'm assuming Han also shares this lack of parental figures, so it's inevitable that both Solo and Skywalker kids are going to be surrounded by a lot of anxiety, and if anything, I would expect what we call an insecure-anxious attachment, which is characterized by a lot of over-protectiveness, rigid boundaries, and high anxiety.

But there is so much unknown . What if Luke currently has no kids, etc...I can guarantee this, though: attachment issues will have a lot to say about the turmoil and stress that pushes this next part of the story forward. There is zero doubt that parent - child issues will be central to the story...because that's what Star Wars has always been about.

I prefer a Luke child, male or female. I want Luke involved in a strong mentoring role throughout the trilogy. I think the reason we will not see a Luke child is due to the difficulties of having to develop Luke's wife/partner. I suspect that if Luke has a child the mother of the child will have died prior to Episode VII. This could adversely affect the father/child relationship. I know this is wishful thinking, since I think we will get a Jaina Solo type character instead.

Latest rumor has it Luke have a Jedi daughter so we will see, but i sure hope Ben is there aswell from the EU.

What rumor is that? Do you have a source / link or are you just talking about fan speculation, because that's all across the board.

I'd dig having a character appear in the form of what we've come to know as Jaina (the powerful "Sword of the Jedi"), but when it comes to the protagonist, I'm still in favor of a son for Luke. A lead in the form of Luke's daughter may certainly happen (though unless something broke today that I missed, there's been no insider / official info either way), but again - and I know some of you will be tired of me saying it - this will mean ignoring the father/son theme that's been such a vital part of the saga. I can't think of a story reason important enough to pass up the chance to see this theme reach its culmination in the ST.

Honestly, I'm not against a female lead (Jedi or otherwise) in Star Wars, but there will be plenty of films with new stories carrying with them the opportunity to explore any character or theme one may like. The purpose of the ST is to continue telling (and as far as we know, possibly conclude) the Skywalker saga, which, through six films, has been built upon very definite themes, traditions, visual and story elements, etc. These elements should serve as the foundation of these new films, not be ignored without regard to what has come before.

I mean, what's the impetus? Just to do something different? We haven't seen it, so it's high time we do? Please. There had better be a rock-solid, story justification to jettison something so meaningful. Why not discard the theme of redemption while we're at it? How about the monomyth? I've not heard one person offer up a legitimate, purposeful, story-driven reason for eliminating the Skywalker father/son theme. As I've alluded to, most of what I've read has been along the lines of "well, it would be different / cool" (ugh...). The best reason I've heard is that some female Star Wars fans would like to have a protagonist to more strongly identify with. That, to me, is completely valid and certainly something I can empathize with, but again, there will be so much opportunity for that to happen (and soon, no doubt), that, to me, it's not reason enough to alter the heart of this particular story.

As a bridge between Anakin's fall and Luke' story there's an important issue to keep in mind with regards to attachment. The one thing that can help us heal emotionally with regards to attachment issues is a stable, meaningful relationship with someone who helps balance us; Padme could have been that person for Anakin (she clearly came from a healthy, happy family)...but the Jedi take that away from him to with their rules and beliefs about relationships. First, say bye bye to your secure base, then we will deny you a meaningful relationship. Not a smart move, Jedi.

"Attachment leads to jealousy...", said Yoda to Anakin.

No, Yoda. Attachment leads to security, stability, and mental health...not to mention longevity. Here Yoda reveals the Jedi's biggest blunder, and essentially the nail in their own coffin. For humans, at least, secure attachment is a necessary ingredient for life.

Anakin's chronic anxiety towards his relationship with Padme (which is fueled by the attachment injury of being removed from his PC and subsequent loss of his mother) was the single tool used by Palpatine.

Now for Luke and Leia...when I have time between spending time with my own 1 and 5 year old.

Jedi are no humans. They are higher beeings connected to the force. Yodas teachings are a product of many thousand years of Jedi experience.

As a bridge between Anakin's fall and Luke' story there's an important issue to keep in mind with regards to attachment. The one thing that can help us heal emotionally with regards to attachment issues is a stable, meaningful relationship with someone who helps balance us; Padme could have been that person for Anakin (she clearly came from a healthy, happy family)...but the Jedi take that away from him to with their rules and beliefs about relationships. First, say bye bye to your secure base, then we will deny you a meaningful relationship. Not a smart move, Jedi.

"Attachment leads to jealousy...", said Yoda to Anakin.

No, Yoda. Attachment leads to security, stability, and mental health...not to mention longevity. Here Yoda reveals the Jedi's biggest blunder, and essentially the nail in their own coffin. For humans, at least, secure attachment is a necessary ingredient for life.

Anakin's chronic anxiety towards his relationship with Padme (which is fueled by the attachment injury of being removed from his PC and subsequent loss of his mother) was the single tool used by Palpatine.

Now for Luke and Leia...when I have time between spending time with my own 1 and 5 year old.

Jedi are no humans. They are higher beeings connected to the force. Yodas teachings are a product of many thousand years of Jedi experience.

Keep in mind it was Anakin's attachment issue that eventually brought him back to the lightside and destroying the Emperor through his son. Clearly the attachment issue is not as black and white as the old Jedi order use to believe. As for Yoda's teaching through years of experience. Kinda like the years of experience where mankind believed the earth was flat... Oh wait.

I will make a fanmovie about Vader true reasons to rebell against his master. It was not attachement, it was a decision of justice. Luke was the one which was free from fear and doubt. he trusted the force 100%. Sidious was fearfull and Vader sensed his doubts. Because of that vader decided to let the strongest rule. Luke was the best choice to serve the force. No attachement involved.

I will make a fanmovie about Vader true reasons to rebell against his master. It was not attachement, it was a decision of justice. Luke was the one which was free from fear and doubt. he trusted the force 100%. Sidious was fearfull and Vader sensed his doubts. Because of that vader decided to let the strongest rule. Luke was the best choice to serve the force. No attachement involved.

I honestly can barely make out a single full thought in this post. Could you edit it up a bit to make more sense? Not trying to be mean or poke fun or anything, but it sounds like you were responding to something I said. I'm far form a grammar Nazi as I am awful at it, but still.

I think an initial question to ask from a psychological point of view is; who is more "damaged"...Luke or Leia? Two very different experiences.

With Leia, you have someone who was most likely told from a young age nothing but glowing things about her birth parents. Based on the closing scene in ROTS, she was loved and cared for as if she was their own...so there is no reason at all to assume she has any significant issues at all. In fact, quite the opposite. She's successful, strong as nails, witty, and very secure in herself. Now some have brought up that she has to deal with the issue of having been tortured by her father etc., but I disagree 100%. Not only did she not know she was his daughter, but neither did Vader. It's a completely different ordeal if he was knowingly torturing his own daughter. Vader did not find out about Leia's existence until hours before his death, and likewise with Leia. Plus, Leia is in a good relationship (I assume) with Han...I don't really see any issues for her to "work out" at all other than reconciling the truth of her past. But she has Han to fall back on, so all in all...very good prognosis for Leia. The one variable with Leia is her newly discovered lineage, and what she may fear with her own children. All in all, though, she had a relatively normal childhood and made a name for herself as she matured.

Luke is another story. I don't get a very "lovey warm touchy feely" vibe from Owen and Beru. Plus, they seem to have taken a different approach than Leia's adoptive parents, more or less holding him back purposely. I just don't get the feeling that they ever talked much about his parents to him, but instead took the opposite approach of avoiding it at all costs out of fear of what the knowledge could do. Luke is clearly thirsty for any knowledge at all about his parents...especially his father...and of course he ends up being lied to. So, we have an adolescent boy with no real PC to attach to at all, and then the only people he knew as parental figures in his life are slaughtered, which leads him on a quest to avenge his father's murder at all cost. From the beginning, the love for his father was driving him. Unlike Leia, Luke has the traumatic experience of the big "reveal", but also has to deal with the very real fact that his father knowingly more or less allowed him to die at the end of TESB. Luke is tortured internally in a way that Leia never had to experience. But then his quest changes...instead of avenging his father, he chooses to save his father, and we all know how that ended up. It's worth noting, though, that in the end, the love for his father was driving him.

So we are left with Leia, who I would argue is more or less a fairly stable individual, but that's because she grew up with a fairly secure attachment...and that shows in her personality. She was also spared much of the family-based trauma that Luke faced all on his own.

Luke, on the other hand, is the one I would worry about. No real parental figures, just caretakers who held him back (out of concern). One father figure (Ben) he starts to become attached to is murdered in front of his eyes by the same man who murdered his father, and then this evil figure turns out to be is true father. Then this real father tries to kill him and manipulate him, only to finally show an ounce of concern by saving him from electrocution at death's door...but then he can't save him and gets to spend all of a minute having an actual conversation with his actual father.

What a nightmare.

What Luke and Leia both have in common is the fear (and we all remember what Yoda said about that) of passing down something evil to their own kids. Not to mention they are raising kids (I'm assuming) with no family support network, which is extremely important. This is discussed in another thread, but the passing on of knowledge, wisdom, and family culture is really important to parents, so just what are they doing? I'm assuming Han also shares this lack of parental figures, so it's inevitable that both Solo and Skywalker kids are going to be surrounded by a lot of anxiety, and if anything, I would expect what we call an insecure-anxious attachment, which is characterized by a lot of over-protectiveness, rigid boundaries, and high anxiety.

But there is so much unknown . What if Luke currently has no kids, etc...I can guarantee this, though: attachment issues will have a lot to say about the turmoil and stress that pushes this next part of the story forward. There is zero doubt that parent - child issues will be central to the story...because that's what Star Wars has always been about.

I'm not sure about this analysis. Sure you raise a good points but ignore some stuff about Leia.

Her reluctance to show her true feelings regarding Han.
Her extremely muted response to the destruction of her home planet.
Her snappy and brash behavior when she is stressed. Leia barely ever shows fear or pain despite having all kinds of reasons to do so. She seems to repress a lot because showing weakness is apparently not something she likes to do very much.
I'm sure she is a good mother but a well-grounded individual? Hm.

Very good points, and you're right, I actually did feel like I ignored some aspects of Leia as I was typing even. Point well taken.

If you don't mind, I have some comments to what you brought up.

Her reluctance to show her true feelings regarding Han.

I see what you're saying, but at the end of Empire she did admit her love openly, and up until then it was a classic cat & mouse game. I'm not really sure I see any reluctance at all on her part...can you elaborate a little bit on what you mean?

Her extremely muted response to the destruction of her home planet.

I'm not sure how one is to react to such an event, but her reaction is actually not uncommon in the face of trauma for anyone (to become momentarily "numb").
That said, she turned her anger into action, and helped lead the force to destroy the Death Star. She isn't just a victim here, she's a leader...I would actually argue that her reaction shows how mentally strong she is. She kept doing her duty. She kept her composure.

I would assume she spent some time in mourning in the years between SW and Empire.

Her snappy and brash behavior when she is stressed. Leia barely ever shows fear or pain despite having all kinds of reasons to do so. She seems to repress a lot because showing weakness is apparently not something she likes to do very much.

And yet, this aspect of her personality never becomes maladaptive for her, which is the proverbial "line in the sand" that tells us if someone's behavior is truly problematic. I would argue that it's her coping mechanism. She's a female leader...she has to be strong, tough...odd that for men we don't judge such behavior as worrisome in our society, instead we see it as being a "strong leader"...but if a woman doesn't fall apart, there must be something wrong with her, right?

Not showing weakness isn't necessarily a problem, especially if you still manage to save the galaxy and maintain a romantic relationship.

I'm sure she is a good mother but a well-grounded individual? Hm.

Extremely, and mainly due to her strong background. Your family of origin is your base...your foundation. Her strength, composure, and yet ability to allow herself to enter into a romantic relationship with Han are all huge pros for her.

Very good points, and you're right, I actually did feel like I ignored some aspects of Leia as I was typing even. Point well taken.

If you don't mind, I have some comments to what you brought up.

Her reluctance to show her true feelings regarding Han.

I see what you're saying, but at the end of Empire she did admit her love openly, and up until then it was a classic cat & mouse game. I'm not really sure I see any reluctance at all on her part...can you elaborate a little bit on what you mean?

She went a bit overboard with Han when he needed to pay Jabba the bounty back. In that situation, anyone would cut him some slack but not so Leia, nono. And there are some other scenes when she pretty needlessly insults him in TESB.
Btw. I don't mind such flaws, they make characters interesting. My most beloved characters have a whole bunch of them.

I'm not sure how one is to react to such an event, but her reaction is actually not uncommon in the face of trauma for anyone (to become momentarily "numb").
That said, she turned her anger into action, and helped lead the force to destroy the Death Star. She isn't just a victim here, she's a leader...I would actually argue that her reaction shows how mentally strong she is. She kept doing her duty. She kept her composure.

I would assume she spent some time in mourning in the years between SW and Empire.

Yes, well, she is never shown to be grieving, not for a second so we must assume she didn't.

Strong, yes, definitely. Strength is very important to her. That's part of what I meant by repression. She doesn't allow herself to be weak. It's why I think she is more similar to her father than Luke is.

Her snappy and brash behavior when she is stressed. Leia barely ever shows fear or pain despite having all kinds of reasons to do so. She seems to repress a lot because showing weakness is apparently not something she likes to do very much.

And yet, this aspect of her personality never becomes maladaptive for her, which is the proverbial "line in the sand" that tells us if someone's behavior is truly problematic. I would argue that it's her coping mechanism. She's a female leader...she has to be strong, tough...odd that for men we don't judge such behavior as worrisome in our society, instead we see it as being a "strong leader"...but if a woman doesn't fall apart, there must be something wrong with her, right?

Not showing weakness isn't necessarily a problem, especially if you still manage to save the galaxy and maintain a romantic relationship.

Nobody says she should fall apart but her nonreaction to her home planets destruction is striking ... and interesting. I agree she doesn't need therapy or something but I would be wary of ever training her in the ways of the force. She is imo more unstable than Luke because that mask she wears could come off someday. Besides her political ideals she seems to be motivated a lot by righteous anger.

Btw. if a male would act like her I'd wonder too. I mean, all these macho characters like James Bond or any Clint Eastwood character ever are fun in movies but in reality I'm not so sure. Because I'm into Star Wars I like to put my analysis glasses on sometimes.

You know, I never quite saw Leia ever being trained (or even being interested in doing so), and I think you just hit the nail on the head for me as to why. You're right; she is consistently motivated by anger, whereas Luke was able to find an "inner peace" that she just never seemed to find. I love over-analyzing Star Wars like this.

I like what you said about her wearing a mask; what do you think is hiding underneath?

You know, I never quite saw Leia ever being trained (or even being interested in doing so), and I think you just hit the nail on the head for me as to why. You're right; she is consistently motivated by anger, whereas Luke was able to find an "inner peace" that she just never seemed to find. I love over-analyzing Star Wars like this.

I like what you said about her wearing a mask; what do you think is hiding underneath?

First, I would like to applaud you for all your intriguing posts so far on this thread. I have been enthralled by reading everyone of them. I find them very interesting as an "attachment parent" myself, and never saw this attachment pattern in SW 'til you brought it up here. I have to say, it does fit. A whole lot.
In reference to Leia, I have always seen her father in her personality. Yes, her mother is there in her appearance and career choices, but her personality is her father's. She is consistently motivated by anger, and I always wonder why. Perhaps there is something to explain that happened to her between ROTS and ANH. Maybe VII will explain this, maybe it won't. I do believe there is a whole lot of catching up to do regarding this gap in time.
I'm not sure what Leia is hiding, but it's very evident throughout the films that she uses this "mask" coping mechanism to deal with any pain she may be feeling at the time. I'm hoping we'll get to see more analysis into Leia's character in the next trilogy, because there is so much mystery surrounding her.

Well thanks, Mata...sometimes I feel like I'm just talking to myself out there.

I think you're (well, I hope you are) right about us learning a lot more about Leia than what we have "officially" been told so far. Attachment is something that has always intrigued me since I learned about it as an undergrad...it just always made sense to me as a nice lens to look at the films through.

Yes, her mother is there in her appearance and career choices, but her personality is her father's. She is consistently motivated by anger, and I always wonder why.

Maybe an unplanned but really important plot-point from the OT. I think Mata is correct; in fact, Luke is very much the antithesis of his father with regards to his personality, where Leai shows all the stubbornness and headstrong attitude that Hayden portrayed as Anakin in the PT.

Posted this in another thread, but it really applies here...just a thought about Luke as a parent:

There are lots of places for wonderful dark conflicts to arise with Luke and Leia being parents.

Luke has absolutely no reference for what it means to be a father...a husband...he's on an emotional island when it comes to playing these roles; not to mention the fear that must exist about what his father became and whether or not that potential lives in him or his children.

My thought would be that Luke would absolutely not want his own children trained as Jedi. Why put them down that road? There's your conflict.

Parents have a natural instinct to protect. Anakin was an extreme example of this...but if this instinct kicks in with Luke, it's possible he could try to prevent his kids from even going down that path. Sorry if that messes up the EU.

Posted this in another thread, but it really applies here...just a thought about Luke as a parent:

There are lots of places for wonderful dark conflicts to arise with Luke and Leia being parents.

Luke has absolutely no reference for what it means to be a father...a husband...he's on an emotional island when it comes to playing these roles; not to mention the fear that must exist about what his father became and whether or not that potential lives in him or his children.

My thought would be that Luke would absolutely not want his own children trained as Jedi. Why put them down that road? There's your conflict.

Parents have a natural instinct to protect. Anakin was an extreme example of this...but if this instinct kicks in with Luke, it's possible he could try to prevent his kids from even going down that path. Sorry if that messes up the EU.

People often parent the way their parental figures parent. Luke was raised by his over protective aunt and uncle. luke's child might be closer to his or her mom, or aunt leia.

Just knowing the evil/scary potential that it could unlock, I would think Luke and Leia may very well both keep their kids from being trained....OR, perhaps one does and the other does not....that could also cause unrest.

What I'm searching for here is potential stress...conflict...something that will help push the story.